After a successful inaugural call for proposals, the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) invites applications for the second round of data-intensive analysis and/or modeling projects for socio-environmental synthesis. Projects employing agent-based modeling approaches are particularly encouraged to apply. Please see the message below for details.

The pursuit of novel, question-driven, and synthetic research into linkages between social and environmental system dynamics that would not be otherwise possible without the use of computationally-intensive data analysis and/or modeling; or

Successful candidates will lead strongly data- and/or modeling-driven research efforts that synthesize understanding at the interface of the social and environmental sciences. Competitive proposals will: 1) bring together social and environmental data in novel ways to address critical socio-environmental research questions that are also actionable, or 2) attempt to advance modeling and/or analytical techniques beyond current applications which may be limited to a single scale of analysis, type of data, and/or disciplinary lenses.

Support Details

SESYNC has significant modeling, data analysis, and database management expertise to guide and support teams that need assistance with the technical aspects of data mining, processing, integration, analysis, visualization, and/or modeling. In addition to providing support for meetings and travel to SESYNC, we may cover the costs of the PI’s salary while in residence at SESYNC and/or salary for a research assistant at the PI’s home institution and/or at SESYNC. A research assistant position could be filled by a graduate research assistant, postdoc, programmer, or database technician depending upon the technical skills required. SESYNC also has standing openings for 2-year Computational Postdoctoral positions that could be associated with a team project if the postdoctoral applicant also has a separate (independent) project they propose through that Computational Postdoc program.

Funded projects will gain access to SESYNC’s advanced cyberinfrastructure, including use of and support for scalable cluster computing and substantial storage capacity (10’s of terabytes per project). Funded projects also receive support for meetings at SESYNC in Annapolis, MD, including travel and group facilitation.

The cumulative effects of local land-use and livelihood changes are a global force of environmental and socio-economic change. Land-use changes result from decisions of individual farmers, pastoralists, and housing consumers and developers (to name a few). Their decisions are influenced by not only local environmental, social, and economic conditions, but also by far-reaching forces such as economic globalization. The choice of a farmer in Brazil to grow soybeans, for example, can be influenced by the consumption of people in China.

Not all land-uses are created equal. Some have minimum impact on the environment, and some offer sustainable livelihoods for local farmers – finding land uses that accomplish both is difficult. Crafting policies to achieve this two-part goal must contend with both local and global considerations.

A study site near Taoyuan, Hunan Province, China.

On January 29th, my colleagues and I published a paper in PLoS ONE, titled “Cross-site comparison of land-use decision-making and its consequences across land systems with a generalized agent-based model” that describes the development and application of an agent-based virtual laboratory for comparing land-use and livelihood decision-making processes of rural farmers across geographically distant locations and qualitatively different land-use systems. We use this modeling system across multiple study sites to understand the underlying motivations and rationale of land-use and livelihood decisions of our ‘farmer agents’ and the landscape and livelihood changes that result under various environmental, demographic, and economic scenarios.

Since the traditional mode of scientific experimentation is not feasible with real land-use systems – we are talking about people’s land and livelihoods here – we use simulation-based cross-site comparisons to teach us about what drives the choice of particular land uses and livelihood strategies under different conditions. We use the set of study sites as local examples to synthesis more broadly applicable knowledge of which factors are most important in what contexts.

To explore this question, our investigation had to happen at the decision-making level – a task to which agent-based models are well suited. We also needed a modeling framework that was sufficiently general that it could be applied across multiple locations, yet realistic enough that it could be grounded in real-world data. These needs gave rise to an innovative agent-based virtual laboratory approach that provides a powerful tool for model-based experimentation and synthesis.

Such a model synthesis system can generate the kind of high-level knowledge needed to inform regional policies designed to foster sustainable local land uses and livelihood strategies. Cross-site comparisons use each study site as an example of alternative conditions and/or potential future states, which can aid scenario analysis and the exploration of potential adaptive responses to changing conditions. Furthermore, insights gained from the application of the modeling system to one site can improve our understanding of other similar sites, and foster future research and policy efforts that are sensitive to both the global influence on and local realities of land-use and livelihood change.

After the avalanche of work that was November and December – and the unintentional hiatus from blogging that created – I have now come up for air and am ready to get back to it. Whether it is a particular point in my career or the fact that we are on the eve of a new year, I’m not sure, but I’m feeling reflective and thought a post about the state of socio-environmental ABMs seemed appropriate. So, here some of my reflections as I look around the landscape of socio-environmental ABMs.

The first thing that jumps out at me is the explosion of ABM papers in the realm of socio-environmental research. ABMs have achieved widespread use to answer an equally varied assortment of questions ranging from climate change adaptation, agricultural change, urban development, water management, ecosystem services, and on and on …. Fortunately, there are also a number of comprehensive and specialized reviews that have recently been published to help wade through all of this research. Two papers I found particularly useful are reviews of decision-making models in ABMs (An, 2012) and spatial ABMs in socio-ecological systems (Filatova et al., 2013).

As the title of this posts suggests, there also seems to be a maturation in the development and application of ABMs in the socio-environmental realm. I see this maturation in many forms, but two trends in particular are striking. First, the sophistication of these models and the algorithms they employ is incredible. Many ABMs are becoming increasingly computationally intensive. For example, a push for more rigorous sensitivity analyses is leading some to explore the entire parameter space of ABMs with spatially explicit sensitivity analysis (Ligmann-Zielinska, 2013). I have also seen an increased implementation of sophisticated computer science techniques, such as cognition-based learning algorithms (Magliocca et al., 2011) and encoding of beliefs (Sun and Müller, 2013).

Second, ABMs have become more realistic. A major trend in the ABM field is developing and marketing ABMs for use with policy analysis. Increased availability of highly detailed data sources has led to an explosion of these application-specific (i.e. ‘case-based’) ABMs. Accompanying the development of realistic models has been an advancement of participatory modeling techniques to actively engage in model design and validation (e.g., Zellner et al., 2012).

Yet, this is the point at which I must pause and ask, “The ABM field is clearly older, but is it wiser?”

Despite the popularity of the approach, ABMers still face significant hurdles to having their work and publications accepted. An interesting survey and companion paper was done by Waldherr and Wiejermans (2013). It describes some of the common critiques that ABM researchers still face when trying to get their work published. While some of the critiques demonstrate a lack of understanding on the part of reviewers, they also illustrate areas where much work remains for ABMers to rigorously test and describe their models in order to answer the critics’ questions.

Finally, the abundance of ‘case-based’ ABMs has led some to ask whether additional case-based ABMs are contributing to the ultimate goal of building coherent theory about the structure, dynamics, and sustainability of socio-environmental systems? Is one more place-based model really advancing the community’s knowledge? How do we move forward with models that are both empirically-grounded and general enough to produce theoretical insights? How do we get to these ‘mid-level’ models? These questions, among others, will be the topic of a panel discussion at the upcoming annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers in Tampa, FL, USA from April 8-12, 2014. I have the privilege of accompanying Steve Manson, Tom Evans, David O’Sullivan, Andrew Crooks, Moira Zellner, Li An, and Sarah Metcalf on the panel – looking forward to the discussion!

The promise of the agent-based approach remains high. Applications of ABMs in the socio-environmental context have matured significantly, but we still have a lot of work to do. I am looking forward to the next phase of ABM development in which multiple approaches, algorithms, and techniques are integrated to advance the reliability and usefulness of our models.

The National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) is inviting proposal submissions for a special funding opportunity designed to support projects pushing the boundaries of computational research in socio-environmental systems. Relevant projects could include (but are not limited to) harmonizing large and/or heterogeneous social and environmental data to answer novel research questions, or developing modeling approaches or applications that are computationally challenging. SESYNC can provide technical support in-house or fund a project team member with sufficient technical skills.

This is an excellent opportunity to push the computational frontiers of your research!

The report Advancing Land Change Modeling: Opportunities and Research Requirements was released recently in pre-publication format via the National Academies Press web site: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18385 Additional report info can be found here as well: http://dels.nas.edu/Report/report/18385. The study committee included several geographers, assessed the current state of land-change modeling, and identified opportunities for future developments in these models.

Urban development, agriculture, and energy production are just a few of the ways that human activities are continually changing and reshaping the Earth’s surface. Land-change models (LCMs) are important tools for understanding and managing present and future landscape conditions, from an individual parcel of land in a city to the vast expanses of forests around the world. A recent explosion in the number and types of land observations, model approaches, and computational infrastructure has ushered in a new generation of land change models capable of informing decision making at a greater level of detail. This National Research Council report, produced at the request of the U.S. Geological Survey and NASA, evaluates the various land-change modeling approaches and their applications, and how they might be improved to better assist science, policy, and decision makers.

Rural livelihoods are changing rapidly with economic globalization and global environmental change, which have direct impacts to environmental and socio-economic suitability. All too often the most vulnerable communities – those with the least resources – face the greatest transitions triggered by changing local and global conditions. Those communities also have livelihoods tied to the land, which may lead to environmental degradation and/or fail to support livelihoods in the future. We must advance our understanding of the causes and consequences of land-livelihood transitions in order to avoid maladapted responses that can lead to a loss of land-livelihood sustainability.

My colleagues and I recently published an article in PLoS ONE that explores these issues with an innovative, generalized agent-based model. Because human decision-making drives land-livelihood transitions, a process-level explanation of adaptive responses is needed to explore the conditions under which land-livelihood transitions emerge. In the short-term, this approach advances the use of agent-based virtual laboratories in sustainability research. In coming generations of this modeling approach, we hope to use model insights to devise effective policy interventions aimed at the decision-making level for supporting sustainability .

Recognizing that humans are major drivers of global environmental change, a workshop was convened to explore the challenges and possibilities of integrating human decision-making into regional and global Earth system models. An article describing our findings has just been published and open for discussion in Earth System Dynamics.

A primary goal of Earth system modelling is to improve understanding of the interactions and feedbacks between human decision making and biophysical processes. The nexus of land use and land cover change (LULCC) and the climate system is an important example. LULCC contributes to global and regional climate change, while climate affects the functioning of terrestrial ecosystems and LULCC. However, at present, LULCC is poorly represented in Global Circulation Models (GCMs). LULCC models that are explicit about human behaviour and decision making processes have been developed at local to regional scales, but the principles of these approaches have not yet been applied to the global scale level in ways that deal adequately with both direct and indirect feedbacks from the climate system. In this article, we explore current knowledge about LULCC modelling and the interactions between LULCC, GCMs and Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs). In doing so, we propose new ways forward for improving LULCC representations in Earth System Models. We conclude that LULCC models need to better conceptualise the alternatives for up-scaling from the local to global. This involves better representation of human agency, including processes such as learning, adaptation and agent evolution, formalising the role and emergence of governance structures, institutional arrangements and policy as endogenous processes and better theorising about the role of tele-connections and connectivity across global networks. Our analysis underlines the importance of observational data in global scale assessments and the need for coordination in synthesising and assimilating available data.

The 2014 Global Land Project Open Science Meeting program will be a combination of plenary sessions involving international figureheads and experts in the field, followed by parallel sessions covering a wide range of topics within the broad themes of the conference. In addition, poster sessions will take place during lunchtimes and early evenings.

We invite you to submit abstracts for presentations and posters for this leading global conference in Land Science. Your contribution should reference one of the conference sessions. The list of sessions is available on: http://www.glp-osm2014.org/conference_sessions.php. In case you do not identify any appropriate session, you may submit to the ‘open session’ that will be structured by the scientific committee.

Abstracts are welcomed in three different formats:

Oral Presentation:

12 minutes + 3 minutes for Q&A

Under conference session category Research Presentation Session

Flash Talk Presentation:

5 minutes based on 3 slides

Under session categories Round-table Discussion Session and Open Session

Poster:
Poster exhibition

Under conference session category Research Presentation Session

Please note that we can only accommodate one oral presentation (plus one flash talk) per attendant. The number of poster presentations is not limited.

This message seems to be popping-up continuously and forcefully in much of the research articles I’ve been reading lately. And I agree – certainly land-use lies at the heart of the sustainability question, since it is a means of food and income production as well as a main source of impacts to ecosystems. Something I read far less often (still looking if you have suggestions!) is a holistic framework for understanding the complex causes and consequences of land-use and livelihood changes.

The factors driving rural household land-use and livelihood decisions are incredibly complex – originating and acting both locally and globally, and often creating both rapid and slow changes in incentives and constraints. For example, see this post about both fast and gradual changes occurring in Chinese food systems. Researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers alike are thus left with huge gaps in understanding of how land-use and livelihood changes come about, and you can forget about accurately predicting such changes and how they might influence environmental and/or livelihood sustainability.

Thinking about this challenge led me back to some of my earlier work in complex system science. In particular, I revisited one of my earlier papers about ‘induced coupling‘ – an idea that faster and slower processes sometimes become ‘coupled’ and lead to dramatic systemic changes. So I tried my hand at throwing together a simple version of what this might look like for a coupled land-livelihood system.

The red, downward arrows represent ‘entrainment’, or ‘slaving’, of the dynamics of lower-level variables by higher-level variables. The green, upward arrows represent processes of ‘self-organization’, or ‘revolt’, in which the dynamics of lower-level variables influence those of higher-level variables. Dashed arrows represent processes that link variables operating at the same time scales. If you would like to know more about this type of framework, referred to as hierarchical complex systems modeling, I will direct you to work by my friends and colleagues Brad Werner and Dylan McNamara (2007).

Now, the recognition that processes, or ‘drivers’, across multiple scales influence land-use and livelihood decisions is nothing new. However, rarely are temporal scales used as the organizing framework. This viewpoint has the potential to explain why certain drivers have different influences in different contexts due to the relative frequencies of interacting processes.

OK, great … so what? Beyond the potential to advance our fundamental understanding of the causes and consequences of livelihood and land-use changes, such a perspective could help craft policy interventions that address not only short-term needs of rural land-users, but also the effects of long-term challenges to sustainability and well-being.

As always, please feel free to yell at me on twitter @nickmags13 if you disagree, or if you prefer to disagree with me on a more regular basis don’t hesitate to follow this blog or subscribe to the RSS feed or email list. ;)